Did you? ... Looks to me like
Yes. Specifically: "By the way, I have volunteered to be allied CO if we don't get some other volunteer soon. However, if folks think we can fill P-40's without me and my guys in them, I would be very pleased to volunteer to be axis CO".
What it looks like to you can't be the whole picture because you don't see the CM forums and my PM's. Also, I don't determine everything. The scenario team goes by majority vote, of which I am one vote.
What I want, is for you to make this one playable for both sides.
I'm with you. I want that, too. Very much. I do think it is playable for both sides.
BUT --
That doesn't mean it's perfect. I've been talking to Perd a lot about things from his perspective, and I think we've got some changes that will make it a lot better. We'll have that out soon.
you put your money where your mouth is
I understand, and I like that concept, too.
I've done it at times. I argued for Ta 152's in Fjord Fury. Folks said that would doom the Lancs. I flew Lancs and took the allied side and put my money where my mouth is. I argued for Bf 110C/Ki-45's in Leyte. Folks said they'd be doomed. I flew those and put my money where my mouth is.
And flying P-40's in Anzio -- because I thought P-40's would be by far the least-favored spot of anything on either side.
I would be up for changing sides instead, but not at this stage.
To make you eat that humble pie
I completely understand that sentiment. It's totally natural, and I feel that way myself sometimes, too. When we run a scenario, whenever I'm on the winning side and if there are any complaints on the other side, I always wish we could re-run it with the sides swapped.